From Massachusetts to 1600 Pennsylvania avenue: Aboard the health reform express

Health Affairs

Volumn 29, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 1106-1111

  Patel, Kavita ^a,b   McDonough, John ^c,d  

^a White House   (United States)

^b NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION   (United States)

^c Senate Committee on Health Education Labor and Pensions   (United States)

^d CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COST CONTROL; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH INSURANCE; LAW; POLICY; REVIEW; UNITED STATES; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; INSURANCE; LEGAL ASPECT; MANDATORY PROGRAM; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; POLITICS; PUBLIC OPINION;

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT; HEALTH CARE REFORM; INSURANCE, HEALTH; MANDATORY PROGRAMS; MASSACHUSETTS; POLITICS; PUBLIC OPINION; STATE GOVERNMENT; UNITED STATES; UNIVERSAL COVERAGE;

EID: 77956901241     PISSN: 02782715     EISSN: 15445208     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0429     Document Type: Review

References (20)

1. Turnbull NC. The Massachusetts model: an artful balance. Health Aff (Millwood). 2006;25(6):w453-6.
2. Pauly MV. Making a case for employer-enforced individual mandates. Health Aff (Millwood). 1994;13(2):21-33.
3. Cutler DM. A guide to health care reform. J Econ Perspect. 1994;8(3):13-29.
4. Massachusetts Health Connector. Health reform facts and figures [Internet]. Boston (MA): Massachusetts Health Connector; updated 2010 April [cited 2010 May 14]. Available from: https://www.mahealthconnector.org/portal/ binary/com.epicentric.contentmanagement.servlet.ContentDeliveryServlet/ About%2520Us/News%2520and%2520Updates/Current/ Week%2520Beginning%2520March%25209%252C%25202008/ Facts%2520and%2520Figures%25203%252008.doc
5. Wielawski I. Forging consensus: the path to health reform in Massachusetts. Report commissioned by the Blue Cross Blue Shield Foundation of Massachusetts. Boston (MA): Blue Cross Blue Shield Foundation of Massachusetts; 2007
6. The Service Employees International Union supported passage, while state and national AFL-CIO affiliates were opposed.
7. Blendon RJ, Buhr T, Fleischfresser C, Benson JM. The Massachusetts health reform law: public opinion and perception. Report commissioned by the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts Foundation. Boston (MA): Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts Foundation; 2006 Nov.
8. Pear R. Senator takes initiative on health care. New York Times. 2008 Nov 11.
9. Letter from Business Roundtable to Sen. Harry Reid [Internet]. 2009 Dec 19 [cited 2010 May 14]. Available from: http://www.businessroundtable.org/sites/ default/files/2009.12.19%20BRT%20FINAL%20Ltr%20to%20Reid.pdf
10. Trumka Rl. AFL-CIO Constitutional Convention acceptance speech [Internet]. AFL-CIO Constitutional Convention. Pittsburgh, PA; 2009 Sep 16 [cited 2010 May 14]. Available from: http://www.aflcio.org/aboutus/ thisistheaflcio/convention/2009/sp091609b.cfm
11. McDonough JE, Rosman B, Phelps F, Shannon M. The third wave of Massachusetts health care access reform. Health Aff (Millwood). 2006;25(6):w420-31. (Pubitemid 44871685)
12. Johnson H, Broder D. The system: the American way of politics at the breaking point. Boston (MA): Little, Brown and Company; 1996.
13. Mulkey M, Smith MD. The long and winding road: reflections on California's "year of health reform." Health Aff (Millwood). 2009;28(3):w446-56.
14. Durenberger D, Foote SB, Nichols L. The ten commandments for presidential leadership on health reform [Internet]. Conference report from The System 2009. Oakridge Conference Center; Chaska (MN); 2008 Apr [cited 2010 May 14]. Available from: http://www.mtlf.org/docs/System-2009-Report.pdf
15. Lazar K. Short term customers boosting health costs. Boston Globe. 2010 Apr 4.
16. The affordability schedule determines who is subject to the requirement imposed on adults in Massachusetts to purchase health insurance, if it is affordable, or pay state tax penalties. It dictates, for different family configurations and income levels, the monthly amount that the Connector Board determines is affordable for people to pay for health coverage. Since the first affordability schedule was adopted in 2007, the Connector Board has voted to increase the schedule each year, at least for people at higher income levels, to maintain the reach of the individual mandate. By doing so, the Connector has determined that it is reasonable public policy to require individuals, couples, and families to pay an increasing percentage of their income for health insurance or face a tax penalty. At some income and age categories, the affordability schedule could now require a couple or family to pay as much as 13-15 percent of their annual income for health insurance (although it is much lower for most income levels).
17. White House officials have cited specific measures in national health reform that will "bend the cost curve," including the Independent Payment Advisory Board, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and a comparative effectiveness research organization. See Orszag PR. Following doctor's orders. OMB Blog [blog on the Internet]. 2010 Apr 1 [cited 2010 May 7]. Available from: https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/10/04/01/Following-DoctorOrders/
18. Turnbull N. Testimony to the Office of Health and Human Services of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 2010 Mar 16.
19. Health reform support has been as low as 32 percent, according to Rasmussen and Gallup polling over the past year. See Health care reform: it's time to decide, and 54% of voters oppose the health care plan. Rasmussen Reports [blog on the Internet]. 2010 Mar 21 [cited 2010 May 7]. Available from: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public-content/politics/current-events/ healthcare/september-2009/health-care-reform
20. Saad L. By slim margin, Americans support healthcare bill's passage. Gallup Poll. 2010 Mar 23.